Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas

In today’s world of volatile fuel prices and climate concerns, there is little study on the relationship between vehicle ownership patterns and attitudes toward vehicle cost (including fuel prices and feebates) and vehicle technologies. This work provides new data on ownership decisions and owner preferences under various scenarios, coupled with calibrated models to microsimulate Austin’s personal-fleet evolution.Opinion survey results suggest that most Austinites (63%, population-corrected share) support a feebate policy to favor more fuel efficient vehicles. Top purchase criteria are price, type/class, and fuel economy. Most (56%) respondents also indicated that they would consider purchasing a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) if it were to cost $6000 more than its conventional, gasoline-powered counterpart. And many respond strongly to signals on the external (health and climate) costs of a vehicle’s emissions, more strongly than they respond to information on fuel cost savings.Twenty five-year simulations of Austin’s household vehicle fleet suggest that, under all scenarios modeled, Austin’s vehicle usage levels (measured in total vehicle miles traveled or VMT) are predicted to increase overall, along with average vehicle ownership levels (both per household and per capita). Under a feebate, HEVs, PHEVs and Smart Cars are estimated to represent 25% of the fleet’s VMT by simulation year 25; this scenario is predicted to raise total regional VMT slightly (just 2.32%, by simulation year 25), relative to the trend scenario, while reducing CO₂ emissions only slightly (by 5.62%, relative to trend). Doubling the trend-case gas price to $5/gallon is simulated to reduce the year-25 vehicle use levels by 24% and CO₂ emissions by 30% (relative to trend).Two- and three-vehicle households are simulated to be the highest adopters of HEVs and PHEVs across all scenarios. The combined share of vans, pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), and cross-over utility vehicles (CUVs) is lowest under the feebate scenario, at 35% (versus 47% in Austin’s current household fleet). Feebate-policy receipts are forecasted to exceed rebates in each simulation year.In the longer term, gas price dynamics, tax incentives, feebates and purchase prices along with new technologies, government-industry partnerships, and more accurate information on range and recharging times (which increase customer confidence in EV technologies) should have added effects on energy dependence and greenhouse gas emissions.     

The Alternative Motor Fuels Act, alternative-fuel vehicles, and greenhouse gas emissions

The corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standard is the major policy tool to improve the fleet average miles per gallon of automobile manufacturers in the US. The Alternative Motor Fuels Act (AMFA) provides special treatment in calculating the fuel economy of alternative-fuel vehicles to give manufacturers CAFE incentives to produce more alternative-fuel vehicles. AMFA has as its goals an increase in the production of alternative-fuel vehicles and a decrease in gasoline consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. This paper examines theoretically the effects of the program set up under AMFA. It finds that, under some conditions, this program may actually increase the production of fuel-inefficient gasoline vehicles, gasoline consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.     

Economic and emissions impacts of renewable fuel goals for aviation in the US

The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has a goal that one billion gallons of renewable jet fuel is consumed by the US aviation industry each year from 2018. We examine the economic and emissions impacts of this goal using renewable fuel produced from a Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) process from renewable oils. Our approach employs an economy-wide model of economic activity and energy systems and a detailed partial equilibrium model of the aviation industry. If soybean oil is used as a feedstock, we find that meeting the aviation biofuel goal in 2020 will require an implicit subsidy from airlines to biofuel producers of $2.69 per gallon of renewable jet fuel. If the aviation goal can be met by fuel from oilseed rotation crops grown on otherwise fallow land, the implicit subsidy is $0.35 per gallon of renewable jet fuel. As commercial aviation biofuel consumption represents less than 2% of total fuel used by this industry, the goal has a small impact on the average price of jet fuel and carbon dioxide emissions. We also find that, under the pathways we examine, the cost per tonne of CO₂ abated due to aviation biofuels is between $50 and $400.     

Socially optimal electric driving range of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles

This study determines the optimal electric driving range of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) that minimizes the daily cost borne by the society when using this technology. An optimization framework is developed and applied to datasets representing the US market. Results indicate that the optimal range is 16 miles with an average social cost of $3.19 per day when exclusively charging at home, compared to $3.27 per day of driving a conventional vehicle. The optimal range is found to be sensitive to the cost of battery packs and the price of gasoline. When workplace charging is available, the optimal electric driving range surprisingly increases from 16 to 22 miles, as larger batteries would allow drivers to better take advantage of the charging opportunities to achieve longer electrified travel distances, yielding social cost savings. If workplace charging is available, the optimal density is to deploy a workplace charger for every 3.66 vehicles. Moreover, the diversification of the battery size, i.e., introducing a pair and triple of electric driving ranges to the market, could further decrease the average societal cost per PHEV by 7.45% and 11.5% respectively.     

Wireless charging in California: Range,recharge, and vehicle electrification

This research evaluated the potential for wireless dynamic charging (charging while moving) to address range and recharge issues of modern electric vehicles by considering travel to regional destinations in California. A 200-mile electric vehicle with a real range of 160 miles plus 40 miles reserve was assumed to be used by consumers in concert with static and dynamic charging as a strict substitute for gasoline vehicle travel. Different combinations of wireless charging power (20–120 kW) and vehicle range (100–300 miles) were evaluated. One of the results highlighted in the research indicated that travel between popular destinations could be accomplished with a 200-mile EV and a 40 kW dynamic wireless charging system at a cost of about $2.5 billion. System cost for a 200-mile EV could be reduced to less than $1 billion if wireless vehicle charging power levels were increased to 100 kW or greater. For vehicles consuming 138 kWh of dynamic energy per year on a 40 kW dynamic system, the capital cost of $2.5 billion plus yearly energy costs could be recouped over a 20-year period at an average cost to each vehicle owner of $512 per year at a volume of 300,000 vehicles or $168 per year at a volume of 1,000,000 vehicles. Cost comparisons of dynamic charging, increased battery capacity, and gasoline refueling were presented. Dynamic charging, coupled with strategic wayside static charging, was shown to be more cost effective to the consumer over a 10-year period than gasoline refueling at $2.50 or $4.00 per gallon. Notably, even at very low battery prices of $100 per kWh, the research showed that dynamic charging can be a more cost effective approach to extending range than increasing battery capacity.     

Carsharing’s life-cycle impacts on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

This paper examines the life-cycle inventory impacts on energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as a result of candidate travelers adopting carsharing in US settings. Here, households residing in relatively dense urban neighborhoods with good access to transit and traveling relatively few miles in private vehicles (roughly 10% of the U.S. population) are considered candidates for carsharing. This analysis recognizes cradle-to-grave impacts of carsharing on vehicle ownership levels, travel distances, fleet fuel economy (partly due to faster turnover), parking demand (and associated infrastructure), and alternative modes. Results suggest that current carsharing members reduce their average individual transportation energy use and GHG emissions by approximately 51% upon joining a carsharing organization. Collectively, these individual-level effects translate to roughly 5% savings in all household transport-related energy use and GHG emissions in the U.S. These energy and emissions savings can be primarily attributed to mode shifts and avoided travel, followed by savings in parking infrastructure demands and fuel consumption. When indirect rebound effects are accounted for (assuming travel-cost savings is then spent on other goods and services), net savings are expected to be 3% across all U.S. households.     

Abatement cost functions for incentive-based policies in the automobile market

This paper compares the outcomes of policies that target vehicle holdings with those that target vehicle usage using data from the US Consumer Expenditure Survey. Results show that a higher price of gasoline shifts vehicle holdings towards more fuel efficient vehicles and reduces the annual demand for miles, whereas imposing a fee on vehicles or a feebate program only shifts vehicle holdings towards more fuel efficient vehicles and has little to no impact on the demand for miles. While it is relatively expensive to reduce CO₂ emission through incentive-based policies, achieving any abatement level is more expensive through imposing fees on vehicles than gasoline taxes. In addition, the maximum amount of abatement attainable by a feebate program is relatively small and the same amount could be achieved by imposing a $0.73 gasoline tax per gallon.     

Evaluating policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from private transportation

This paper proposes a model system to forecast household greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) from private transportation. The proposed model combines an integrated discrete-continuous car ownership model with MOVES 2014. Four modeling components are calibrated and applied to the calculation of GHGEs: vehicle quantity, vehicle type and vintage, miles traveled, and rates of GHGEs. The model is applied to the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area. Three tax schemes are evaluated: vehicle ownership tax, purchase tax and fuel tax. We calculate that the average GHGEs per vehicle is 5.15 tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO₂E) gases. Our results show that: (a) a fuel tax is the most effective way to reduce vehicle GHGEs, especially for households with fewer vehicles; (b) a purchase tax reduces vehicle GHGEs mainly by decreasing vehicle quantity for households with more vehicles; and (c) an ownership tax reduces vehicle GHGEs by decreasing both vehicle quantity and miles traveled.     

Fuel economy improvements for urban driving: Hybrid vs. intelligent vehicles

The quest for more fuel-efficient vehicles is being driven by the increasing price of oil. Hybrid electric powertrains have established a presence in the marketplace primarily based on the promise of fuel savings through the use of an electric motor in place of the internal combustion engine during different stages of driving. However, these fuel savings associated with hybrid vehicle operation come at the tradeoff of a significantly increased initial vehicle cost due to the increased complexity of the powertrain. On the other hand, telematics-enabled vehicles may use a relatively cheap sensor network to develop information about the traffic environment in which they are operating, and subsequently adjust their drive cycle to improve fuel economy based on this information – thereby representing ‘intelligent’ use of existing powertrain technology to reduce fuel consumption. In this paper, hybrid and intelligent technologies using different amounts of traffic flow information are compared in terms of fuel economy over common urban drive cycles. In order to develop a fair comparison between the technologies, an optimal (for urban driving) hybrid vehicle that matches the performance characteristics of the baseline intelligent vehicle is used. The fuel economy of the optimal hybrid is found to have an average of 20% improvement relative to the baseline vehicle across three different urban drive cycles. Feedforward information about traffic flow supplied by telematics capability is then used to develop alternative driving cycles firstly under the assumption there are no constraints on the intelligent vehicle’s path, and then taking into account in the presence of ‘un-intelligent’ vehicles on the road. It is observed that with telematic capability, the fuel economy improvements equal that achievable with a hybrid configuration with as little as 7 s traffic look-ahead capability, and can be as great as 33% improvement relative to the un-intelligent baseline drivetrain. As a final investigation, the two technologies are combined and the potential for using feedforward information from a sensor network with a hybrid drivetrain is discussed.     

An environmental-economic evaluation of hybrid electric vehicles: Toyota's Prius vs. its conventional internal combustion engine Corolla

We compare the second generation of the first commercial hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), the Toyota Prius, to the conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) Toyota Corolla. The more complicated and expensive Prius has lower pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions and better fuel economy than the Corolla. In a world of limited resources and many petroleum users and emissions sources, the policy question is whether the best use of resources is to build hybrids, to improve the fuel economy and environmental emissions of other mobile sources, or to devote the resources to other environmental projects. We find that the Prius is not cost-effective in improving fuel economy or lowering emissions. For the Prius to be attractive to US consumers, the price of gasoline would have to be more than three times greater than at present. To be attractive to regulators, the social value of abating tailpipe emissions would have to be 14 times greater than conventional values. Alternatively, the value of abating greenhouse gas emissions would have to be at least $217/t. There are many opportunities for abating pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions at lower cost. We conclude that hybrids will not have significant sales unless fuel prices rise several-fold or unless regulators mandate them.     

Cost-benefit analysis of alternative vehicles in the Philippines using immediate and distant future scenarios

Alternative vehicle technologies promise a sustainable future by reducing carbon emissions and pollution. However, their widespread adoption tends to be slow due to high costs and uncertainties in benefits. Using a life cycle-based approach, this study calculates ownership savings and societal benefits for various alternative vehicle technologies against their baseline vehicle technology (e.g. gasoline or diesel). The assessment is performed from a developing country context – in the Philippines. Furthermore, immediate and distant future scenarios are modeled. The immediate future scenario assesses costs and benefits if the shift is to happen now, while the distant future scenario considers the effect of widespread autonomous driving and ridesharing. The results of the study echo the significant societal benefits from electric- and fuel cell-powered vehicles found in literature, but they are hindered by high ownership costs. In the immediate future, the diesel hybrid electric vehicle can potentially have both positive societal and operational costs for public transportation. For a gasoline-powered private passenger car, a simple shift to diesel, 20% biodiesel or 85% methanol can be beneficial. In the distant future, it is expected that autonomous, rideshared vehicles can potentially lure people away from driving their own vehicles, because of lower costs per passenger-kilometer while sustaining the privacy and comfort of a private car.     

Impact of fuel price on vehicle miles traveled (VMT): do the poor respond in the same way as the rich?

The effects of fuel price on travel demand for different income groups reveal the choices and constraints they are faced with. The first purpose of this study is to understand these underlying choices and constraints by examining the variation of fuel price elasticity of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) across income groups. On the other hand, the rebound effect—increase in VMT as a result of improvement in fuel efficiency may offset the negative effect of fuel price on VMT. The second purpose of this study is to compare the relative magnitudes of the fuel price elasticity of VMT and the rebound effect. A system of structural equations with VMT and fuel efficiency (MPG, miles per gallon) as endogenous variables is estimated for households at different income levels from 2009 National Household Travel Survey. Higher income households show greater fuel price elasticity than lower income households. Fuel price elasticities are found to be ?0.41 and ?0.35 for the two highest income groups, while an elasticity of ?0.24 for the lowest income group is identified. The rebound effect is found to be only significant for the lowest income households as 0.7. These findings suggest the potential ability of using fuel price as a tool to affect VMT. The study results also suggest possible negative consequences faced by lower income households given an increase in fuel price and call for more studies in this area.     

Fuel economy,cost, and greenhouse gas results for alternative fuel vehicles in 2011

This paper presents in-service data collected from over 300 alternative fuel vehicles and over 80 fueling stations to help fleets determine what types of applications and alternative fuels may help them reduce their environmental impacts and fuel costs. The data were compiled in 2011 by over 30 organizations in New York State using a wide variety of commercial vehicle types and technologies. Fuel economy, incremental vehicle purchase cost, fueling station purchase cost, greenhouse gas reductions, and fuel cost savings data clarifies the performance of alternative fuel vehicles and fuel stations. Data were collected from a range of vehicle types, including school buses, delivery trucks, utility vans, street sweepers, snow plows, street pavers, bucket trucks, paratransit vans, and sedans. CNG, hybrid, LPG, and electric vehicles were tracked.     

The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping

Greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping are an increasing concern. The paper evaluates whether vessel speed reduction can be a potentially cost-effective CO₂ mitigation option for ships calling on US ports. By applying a profit-maximizing equation to estimate route-specific, economically-efficient speeds, we explore policy impacts of a fuel tax and a speed reduction mandate on CO₂ emissions. The profit-maximizing function incorporates opportunity costs associated with speed reduction that go unobserved in more traditional marginal abatement cost analyses. We find that a fuel tax of about $150/ton fuel will lead to average speed-related CO₂ reductions of about 20–30%. Moreover, a speed reduction mandate targeted to achieve 20% CO₂ reduction in the container fleet costs between $30 and $200 per ton CO₂ abated, depending on how the fleet responds to a speed reduction mandate.     

Planning for economic and environmental resilience

Climate protection will require major reductions in GHG emissions from all sectors of the economy, including the transportation sector. Slowing growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be necessary for reducing transportation GHG emissions, even with major breakthroughs in vehicle technologies and low-carbon fuels (Winkelman et al., 2009). The Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) supports market-based policy approaches that minimize costs and maximize benefits. Our research indicates that significant GHG reductions can be achieved through smart growth and travel efficiency measures that increase accessibility, improve travel choices and make optimum use of existing infrastructure. Moreover, we find such measures can deliver compelling economic benefits, including avoided infrastructure costs, leveraged private investment, increased local tax revenues and consumer vehicle ownership and operating cost savings (Winkelman et al., 2009).As a society, what we build – where and how – has a tremendous impact on our carbon footprint, from building design to transportation infrastructure and land-use patterns. The empirical and modeling evidence is clear – people drive less in locations with efficient land use patterns, high quality travel choices and reinforcing policies and incentives (Ewing et al., 2008). It is also clear that there is growing and unmet market demand for walkable communities, reinforced by demographic shifts and higher fuel prices (Leinberger, 2006, Nelson, 2007). Transportation policy in the United States must rise to meet this demand for more travel choices and more livable communities.The academic, ideological and political debates about the level of GHG reductions and penetration rates that can or should be achieved via smart growth and pricing on the one hand, or measures such as ‘eco-driving’ and signal optimization on the other, have served their purpose: we know which policies are ‘directionally correct’ – policies that reduce GHG emissions even though we may not know the scope of those reductions. Now is the time to implement directionally correct policies, assess what works best where, and refine policy based on the results. It is a framework that CCAP calls “Do. Measure. Learn.”The Federal government is poised to spend $500 billion on transportation (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 2009). CCAP encourages Congress to “Ask the Climate Question” – will our transportation investments help reduce GHG emissions or exacerbate the problem? Will they help increase our resilience to climate change impacts or increase our vulnerability? And, while we’re at it, will our investment foster energy security, livable communities and a vibrant economy? Federal transportation and climate policies should empower communities to implement locally-determined travel efficiency solutions by providing appropriate funding, tools and technical support.     

Life cycle model of alternative fuel vehicles: emissions,energy, and cost trade-offs

This paper describes a life cycle model for performing level-playing field comparisons of the emissions, costs, and energy efficiency trade-offs of alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) through the fuel production chain and over a vehicle lifetime. The model is an improvement over previous models because it includes the full life cycle of the fuels and vehicles, free of the distorting effects of taxes or differential incentives. This spreadsheet model permits rapid analyses of scenarios in plots of trade-off curves or efficiency frontiers, for a wide range of alternatives with current and future prices and levels of technology. The model is available on request.The analyses indicate that reformulated gasoline (RFG) currently has the best overall performance for its low cost, and should be the priority alternative fuel for polluted regions. Liquid fuels based on natural gas, M100 or M85, may be the next option by providing good overall performance at low cost and easy compatibility with mainstream fuel distribution systems. Longer term, electric drive vehicles using liquid hydrocarbons in fuel cells may offer large emissions and energy savings at a competitive cost. Natural gas and battery electric vehicles may prove economically feasible at reducing emissions and petroleum consumption in niches determined by the unique characteristics of those systems.     

Transport energy consumption in mountainous roads. A comparative case study for internal combustion engines and electric vehicles in Andorra

This paper analyses transport energy consumption of conventional and electric vehicles in mountainous roads. A standard round trip in Andorra has been modelled in order to characterise vehicle dynamics in hilly regions. Two conventional diesel vehicles and their electric-equivalent models have been simulated and their performances have been compared. Six scenarios have been simulated to study the effects of factors such as orography, traffic congestion and driving style. The European fuel consumption and emissions test and Artemis urban driving cycles, representative of European driving cycles, have also been included in the comparative analysis. The results show that road grade has a major impact on fuel economy, although it affects consumption in different levels depending on the technology analysed. Electric vehicles are less affected by this factor as opposed to conventional vehicles, increasing the potential energy savings in a hypothetical electrification of the car fleet. However, electric vehicle range in mountainous terrains is lower compared to that estimated by manufacturers, a fact that could adversely affect a massive adoption of electric cars in the short term.     

Fuel economy testing of autonomous vehicles

Environmental pollution and energy use in the light-duty transportation sector are currently regulated through fuel economy and emissions standards, which typically assess quantity of pollutants emitted and volume of fuel used per distance driven. In the United States, fuel economy testing consists of a vehicle on a treadmill, while a trained driver follows a fixed drive cycle. By design, the current standardized fuel economy testing system neglects differences in how individuals drive their vehicles on the road. As autonomous vehicle (AV) technology is introduced, more aspects of driving are shifted into functions of decisions made by the vehicle, rather than the human driver. Yet the current fuel economy testing procedure does not have a mechanism to evaluate the impacts of AV technology on fuel economy ratings, and subsequent regulations such as Corporate Average Fuel Economy targets. This paper develops a method to incorporate the impacts of AV technology within the bounds of current fuel economy test, and simulates a range of automated following drive cycles to estimate changes in fuel economy. The results show that AV following algorithms designed without considering efficiency can degrade fuel economy by up to 3%, while efficiency-focused control strategies may equal or slightly exceed the existing EPA fuel economy test results, by up to 10%. This suggests the need for a new near-term approach in fuel economy testing to account for connected and autonomous vehicles. As AV technology improves and adoption increases in the future, a further reimagining of drive cycles and testing is required.     

Effect of mass on multimodal fuel consumption in moving people and freight in the U.S.

The United States transportation sector consumes 5 billion barrels of petroleum annually to move people and freight around the country by car, truck, train, ship and aircraft, emitting significant greenhouse gases in the process. Making the transportation system more sustainable by reducing these emissions and increasing the efficiency of this multimodal system can be achieved through several vehicle-centric strategies. We focus here on one of these strategies – reducing vehicle mass – and on collecting and developing a set of physics-based expressions to describe the effect of vehicle mass reduction on fuel consumption across transportation modes in the U.S. These expressions allow analysts to estimate fuel savings resulting from vehicle mass reductions (termed fuel reduction value, FRV), across modes, without resorting to specialized software or extensive modeling efforts, and to evaluate greenhouse gas emission and cost implications of these fuel savings. We describe how FRV differs from fuel intensity (FI) and how to properly use both of these metrics, and we provide a method to adjust FI based on mass changes and FRV. Based on this work, we estimate that a 10% vehicle mass reduction (assuming constant payload mass) results in a 2% improvement in fuel consumption for trains and light, medium, and heavy trucks, 4% for buses, and 7% for aircraft. When a 10% vehicle mass reduction is offset by an increase in an equivalent mass of payload, fuel intensity (fuel used per unit mass of payload) increases from 6% to 23%, with the largest increase being for aircraft.     

Retrofitted plug-in hybrid vehicles: Results of NYIT drive share program

This paper presents results from a plug-in hybrid vehicle drive share program involving retrofitted hybrid electric vehicles. A potential for high fuel efficiency is indicated, however, the average fuel efficiency was only marginally better than conventional hybrid vehicles. This is due to the majority of vehicle miles traveled occurring on trips outside the “all electric” range and very short trips where fuel consumption is dominated by emissions control strategies. The work also considers the availability of the battery for vehicle to grid services and finds that there are a large number of trips in the afternoon period, typically when electrical demand is at a peak. Vehicle charging activity also tended towards daytime activity, contrary to the oft-assumed off-peak charging pattern.